MIT SINGH Vs. RUR SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of the above titled appeal as well as R.S.A. Nos. 159, 160, and 161 all of 1976 and titled as State of Punjab v. Rur Singh and others, as all these appeals have arisen out of the same suit.

(2.) The facts giving rise to these appeals are that the present respondents Nos. 1 to 4 who are sons of Pala Singh filed his suit against the State of Punjab and Mit Singh for a declaration that they were owners and in possession of the suit land measuring 198 Bighas and the orders of the Special Collector, Punjab and Chandigarh dated 17.1.1963 declaring the land measuring 12 standard acres 10-1/4 units out of the above land as surplus was illegal, ultra vires and void. It may be mentioned here that originally the defendants arrayed were the State of Punjab and Pala Singh. Mit Singh filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being impleaded as a party on the ground that land measuring 54 Bighas 16 Biswas out of the suit land had been allotted to him and he had become its owner. By the time that application was decided Pala Singh had died. His name was struck off. The application filed by Mit Singh was allowed and he was impleaded as a party. According to the allegations in the amended plaint, the plaintiffs had no independent source of livelihood and, therefore, their father Pala Singh gave them 209 Bighas 18 Biswas of the land as detailed in paragraph 2 of the plaint, for their maintenance. The plaintiffs started cultivating the aforesaid land. Consolidation proceedings took place in the village and in lieu of the said land they were allotted the suit land. Pala Singh executed a registered gift deed in respect of the suit land in their favour on 8.10.1956 . At the time of enforcement of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 (for short the Act), the plaintiffs were in possession of the aforesaid land. As they were enjoying its profits, therefore, they would be deemed to be landowners as defined in sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act which definition has been adopted by the Act. After the gift, mutation was also sanctioned in their favour and their names came to be recorded in the revenue papers as owners in respect of the suit land. It was incumbent upon the revenue authorities to issue draft statement to them in case the suit land was to be declared as surplus. In fact, it could not have been declared surplus as it was less than their permissible area, as provided under the Act. The Special Collector, Punjab, considering this land as belonging to their father, Pala Singh declared 12 standard acres and 10-1/4 units of land out of it as surplus. The Special Collector did not issue any notice to the plaintiffs nor any draft statement, as required under section 32-D of the Act was issued to them and, therefore, the said order was illegal, ultra vires and void. The Special Collector also adopted a wrong standard for converting the aforesaid land into standard acres. The Schedule followed by the Special Collector was land into standard acres. The schedule followed by the Special Collector was as given in Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Rules, 1958 which had been declared ultra vires of rule 5 of the above Rules as well as the section 2 clause (1) of the Act so far as it related to Sangrur District.

(3.) Regarding Mit Singh defendant, it was averred that though some land was said to have been allotted to him, but the possession thereof was still with the plaintiffs.